The claim was for damages after alleged price fixing by the defendants. The claimants sought to recover for themselves and as representatives of others who had similarly suffered. The defendants sought that the representative element of the claim be struck out, saying that the class purported to be represented had not been sufficently clearly established.
Held: The power was derived entirely from the rules. It did not matter that the number of people who might be represented was large.
The persons said to have the relevant common interest, must have it at the time the claim is begun. The claimant here failed in that element. Membership of the class asserted here could only be determined at the conclusion of the proceedings; ‘Rule 19.6 does not authorise these claimants to represent the class described in the particulars of claim. The simple reason is that it is impossible to say of any given person that he was a member of the class at the time the claim form was issued. It is not that the class consists of a fluctuating body of persons but that the criteria for inclusion in the class cannot be satisfied at the time the action is brought because they depend on the action succeeding.’
[2009] EWHC 741 (Ch), [2009] UKCLR 801, [2009] CP Rep 32
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – CBS Songs Ltd v Amstrad Consumer Electronics Plc CA 1987
Persons other than the Attorney General do not have standing to enforce, through a civil court, the observance of the criminal law as such. However, Sir Denys Buckley considered that such a claim might be maintained as a representative action . .
Cited – Duke of Bedford v Ellis HL 10-Dec-1900
Ellis and five others sued on behalf of themselves and all other growers of fruit, flowers, vegetables, roots or herbs to enforce rights conferred on them by the Covent Garden Act 1828 against the Duke of Bedford as the owner of the market. The Duke . .
Cited – Aberconway v Whetnall 1918
Lord Aberconway and others sought to recover for themselves and all other subscribers to a fund for the benefit of the defendant the amounts they had collectively subscribed on the grounds that they were induced to do so by misrepresentation.
Cited – John v Rees and Others; Martin and Another v Davis and Others ChD 1969
The Court was asked as to the validity of proceedings at a meeting of the members of the local Labour Party which had broken up in disorder. The proceedings were instituted by the leader of one faction on behalf of himself and all other members of . .
Cited – Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd (No 2) CA 1982
A plaintiff shareholder cannot recover damages merely because the company in which he has an interest has suffered damage. He cannot recover a sum equal to the diminution in the market value of his shares, or equal to the likely diminution in . .
Cited – Smith and others v Cardiff Corporation (No.1) CA 1954
Four plaintiffs set out to represent 13,000 tenants, and sought to challenge a proposed rent increase. The scheme they sought to challenge provided for different rents taking into consideration the financial circumstances of individual tenants. Of . .
Cited – Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd ChD 1979
Members of the defendant company had approved in general meeting, of an acquisition of the assets of another company in which its directors were substantially interested. The shareholders’ approval was given on the basis of a circular. The action . .
Cited – Irish Shipping Ltd v Commercial Union Assurance Co Ltd CA 1991
77 underwriters entered into separate insurances but on the same terms including one which obliged that underwriter to abide by any judgment obtained by the insured against the lead underwriter.
Held: The principle in Duke of Bedford applied . .
Cited – National Bank Of Greece SA and Another v RM Outhwaite 317 Syndicate and Others ComC 16-Jan-2001
Smith J emphasised that CPR Rule 19.6 is to be interpreted and applied with the overriding objective in mind. That principle was applied to enable one Lloyd’s syndicate who subscribed to a particular policy to represent all the other syndicates who . .
Cited – Independiente Ltd and others v Music Trading On-Line (HK) Ltd and others ChD 13-Mar-2003
The claimants claimed damages for the sale by the defendants in the UK of CD’s manufactured for sale only in the far East. The defendants challenged the right of a claimant phonographic society to have the right to sue on behalf of its members.
Cited by:
See Also – Emerald Supplies Ltd and Another v British Airways Plc CA 18-Nov-2010
. .
See Also – Emerald Supplies Ltd and Others v British Airways Plc and Others (3514) ChD 28-Oct-2014
Two applications in this action: 1) The Defendants’ application for the striking out and/or summary dismissal of the Claimants’ claims in the torts of unlawful means conspiracy and unlawful interference; and 2) The Claimants’ application for two . .
See Also – Emerald Supplies Ltd and Others v British Airways Plc and (3513) ChD 28-Oct-2014
A hearing of an Application whereby the Claimants requested the Court to review (with such judicial assistance as might be necessary) the appropriateness / lawfulness of the redactions made by the Defendant airline (‘BA’) and other airlines to the . .
See Also – Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways ChD 22-Jul-2015
The judge was hearing a very substantial action between the parties. He had recently travelled to Italy and came back on one of the defendant’s aircraft. The defendant lost the luggage of all passengers and had failed to deal adequately or at all . .
See Also – Air Canada and Others v Emerald Supplies Limited and Others CA 14-Oct-2015
Appeal against case management directions given by Peter Smith J. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Commercial, European
Updated: 15 December 2021; Ref: scu.331153
